Breakthrough in logic

Posted on by

Hubbard proudly announces his 1970 breakthrough in logic:

“I have found a way now to unlock this subject [logic]. This is a breakthrough which is no small win. If by it a formidable and almost impossible subject can be reduced to simplicity, then correct answers to situations can be far more frequent and an organization or a civilization far more effective.

“The breakthrough is a simple one.

“BY ESTABLISHING THE WAYS IN WHICH THINGS BECOME ILLOGICAL, ONE CAN THEN ESTABLISH WHAT IS LOGIC.

“In other words, if one has a grasp of what makes things illogical or irrational (or crazy, if you please) it is then possible to conceive of what makes things logical.”

What he must have overlooked though is the fact that to establish the ways in which things become illogical, one must have established already what is logical.

One of the Hubbardian Fallacies

Posted on by

“The ability to perceive the world around one and the ability to draw accurate conclusions about it are, to all intents, the same thing.

“Glasses are a symptom of the decline of consciousness.” Hubbard, NSOL, 75/76

This is empiricism pure and invalidates the very essence of consciousness which is to be self aware and being self aware one has meta-perception and can think things over and evaluate. Evaluation is not part of perception. Drawing conclusions are processes of logic and reason, not perception.

Same with glasses they have nothing to do with consciousness. All these professors with glasses do not in the least suffer from lack of consciousness. Hubbard confuses awareness or sentience with consciousness as has been pointed out already.

See https://xscn.mgtconcepts.com/?p=470

Plato’s version of ‘Life is basically kinetic’

Posted on by

“The soul through all her being is immortal, for that which is ever in motion is immortal; but that which moves another and is moved by another, in ceasing to move ceases also to live.

Only the self-moving, never leaving self, never ceases to move, and is the fountain and beginning of motion to all that moves besides. Now, the beginning is unbegotten, for that which is begotten has a beginning; but the beginning is begotten of nothing, for if it were begotten of something, then the begotten would not come from a beginning. But if unbegotten, it must also be indestructible; for if beginning were destroyed, there could be no beginning out of anything, nor anything out of a beginning; and all things must have a beginning.

And therefore the self-moving is the beginning of motion; and this can neither be destroyed nor begotten, else the whole heavens and all creation would collapse and stand still, and never again have motion or birth. But if the self-moving is proved to be immortal, he who affirms that self-motion is the very idea and essence of the soul will not be put to confusion. For the body which is moved from without is soulless; but that which is moved from within has a soul, for such is the nature of the soul. But if this be true, must not the soul be the self-moving, and therefore of necessity unbegotten and immortal?”

Plato – Phaedrus

A DEFINITION OF MATHEMATICS

Posted on by

Mathematics are the organizational principles, functions and structures underlying all thought and manifestation.

Mathematics are the noumenal, formal [giving form to] and organizational principles underlying all thought and phenomenal manifestation.

Life is basically kinetic

Posted on by

Life is energy, is motion and is also in-formation. Life is mind and soul and always in motion. The motion is expressed by thought in the mental sphere. All this occurs both in and outside of spacetime. Everything is in motion whether in the physical world or in the mental world.

Theta in Scientology is defined as life energy, thought, spirit, soul even divine energy and it is also surprisingly defined as ‘static’. The latter was perhaps Hubbard’s biggest goof, as thought, everyone who has ever tried to do TR 0 knows, is all but static.

Hubbard believed that everything not in spacetime must be devoid of motion. If Hubbard were right and life were static, how could it ever communicate with MEST which is all motion?

ZERO

Posted on by
Reply

Zero is not merely a static. What’s static is the boundary. Zero is the static boundary containing a dynamic infinity, all potential that can eventually be de-fined.

To say, like Hubbard does, that life is a static is falsely equating life with the zero boundary condition. In fact life consists of an infinite variety of motion. The motion of thought is basic but is transformed into physical motion through spacetime.

Zero is the ground state of the universe, it is not non-existence which would not have any properties at all, so nothing could be said about it. Zero is the container of infinity and infinity contains all frequencies and if you add them together all the plus and the minus, the real and imaginary numbers you get zero. Σ (x1+x2+…xn )=0 where xn is any and all existents.

ARC vs. ABC

Posted on by
Reply

Social psychology is based on the ABCs of affect, behavior, and cognition. In order to effectively maintain and enhance our own lives through successful interaction with others, we rely on these three basic and interrelated human capacities:

ref. https://positivepsychology.com/albert-ellis-abc-model-rebt-cbt/

  1. Affect (feelings)
  2. Behavior (interactions)
  3. Cognition (thought)

In Scientology this reads A, R and C.

  1. Affinity (feelings)
  2. Reality (thought)
  3. Communication (interactions)

COMMUNICATION DOES NOT EQUAL UNDERSTANDING

Posted on by
Reply

A signal, message or auditory communication to arrive at understanding goes through several stages. These are duplication (hearing), discrimination (detecting differentials, such as between the sounds ‘b’ and ‘d’, identification (it’s a ‘b’ or it’s a ‘d’), association (these sounds add up to a word), onto understanding (the correct meaning for the word).
In other words the communication has to be processed correctly in order to result in understanding. That is why ARC is not enough, the raw data need to be analyzed, processed, evaluated in order to reach understanding.

References:

Auditory Processing Disorder | Dr. Angela Loucks Alexander

Compare Axiom 28 original and revised version.

Article: Why arc does not equate to understanding https://xscn.mgtconcepts.com/?p=724